eChurch Christian Blog

Cross-post by Joseph at the Rosh Pina Project:-

If you are a Christian in leadership, please copy and amend the following letter with your name, and email it to the Knesset Christian Allies Caucus at: christianalliescaucus@gmail.com.

Do also write to the Israeli embassy in your country.

Dear Sir,

We write to you as Christian leaders who are staunch supporters and friends of the state of Israel.

Our concerns surround the organization in Israel ‘Yad L’Achim’ which calls itself an “anti-missionary” organization. Over a prolonged period of time, Yad L’Achim has been actively hostile towards people who hold to beliefs which they consider heretical.

In November 2009, a man named Yaakov Teitel confessed to having murdered two Palestinian Arabs, attempted to murder a Messianic Jewish family, and deliberately wounded an Israeli professor. Yaakov Teitel placed a bomb in the home of a Messianic Jewish family, which resulted in serious injuries to the family’s teenage son Ami Ortiz. In particular, the case of Ami Ortiz has concerned many Evangelical Christians outside of Israel.

It has recently emerged that Yakov Teitel was actively involved in the Yad L’Achim organization over a 5 year period prior to his arrest. I would draw your attention to the recent petition from attorney Calev Myers of the Jerusalem Institute of Justice to the Attorney General of Israel, Mr Yehuda Weinstein. Myers’ letter regarding the Yad L’Achim organisation may be read online:

http://www.jij.org.il/articles/JIJ-AG%20Request_ENG_.pdf

The report shows that Yad L’Achim activists and leaders have consistently spouted propaganda against individuals and charitable organisations whose beliefs do not correspond to their own. Yad L’Achim has also been connected to actual cases of physical attack, as well as several cases of harassing and intimidating individuals and communities over a long period of time.

We would urge the Government of Israel to disband the Yad L’Achim organization so that both the quality of Israeli democracy and the freedom and security of all Israeli citizens may be improved. To disband Yad L’Achim, we believe, would be in-line with the interests of the state of Israel and of the wider international community.

Many thanks for your assistance. I hope to hear from you soon.

Yours faithfully,

There is a fair bit of online activity in response to a Sunday Telegraph article by Andrew Gilligan, claiming the Labour party has been “infiltrated” by Islamic extremists, in the form of Islamic Forum Europe (IFE).

This from the Spitoon

The Telegraph has published news of a six-month investigation which it undertook with Channel 4’s Dispatches on the Islamic Forum Europe (IFE). The IFE is a Jamaat-e-Islami entryist organisation which now commands a sizeable vote bloc and is physically located in the East London Mosque (ELM) with which it is closely linked. The chairman of ELM is Mohammed Abdul Bari, who is a former president of the IFE and is the current Secretary General of the Muslim Council of Britain.

Continue Reading

Obviously anti-Islamic websites are featuring this news heavily and repeating the Telegraph article verbatim.

Cranmer has a very insightful article on this one as usual:-

Andrew Gilligan is usually sound, so there is no immediate reason to dismiss his report in The Sunday Telegraph that the Labour Party have been ‘infiltrated by a fundamentalist Muslim group that wants to create an “Islamic social and political order” in Britain’.

He quotes the Environment Minister Jim Fitzpatrick, that the Islamic Forum of Europe (IFE) have become ‘a secret party within Labour and other political parties’. He says the group ‘believes in jihad and sharia law, and wants to turn Britain and Europe into an Islamic state’. In order to do this, it ‘has placed sympathisers in elected office and claims, correctly, to be able to achieve “mass mobilisation”’.

He appears to be oblivious to the fact that all Muslims ‘believe’ in jihad and sharia law: it is the duty of all Muslims to struggle for their faith and live a life in submission to the laws of Allah; it is what makes a Muslim a Muslim. But he appears to be incapable of distinguishing between the plethora of schools of thought on these theo-political concepts: one Muslim’s jihad and sharia are not another Muslim’s jihad and sharia: theological interpretation has been devolved and judicial authority protestantised.

This is not the first time Mr Fitzpatrick has incited ill-feeling towards his Muslim constituents: it was he who back in August ‘stormed out’ of a wedding reception when he refused to be separated from his wife.

And here he is now decrying a Muslim group for ‘acting almost as an entryist organisation, placing people within the political parties, recruiting members to those political parties, trying to get individuals selected and elected so they can exercise political influence and power, whether it’s at local government level or national level’.

‘Twas ever thus.

In a liberal representative democracy, it is the right of any legally-constituted group to order itself, get its members to join political parties, and then get them selected and elected ‘so they can exercise political influence and power’.

Good grief, even The Countryside Alliance are at it. And only a few weeks ago, an anonymous Conservative was decrying the same strategy of the Evangelical Christians.

Continure Reading

UPDATE: Harry’s Place have now covered this one:-

The Sunday Telegraph has published four articles about the Islamic Forum of Europe’s baleful influence on politics in East London.

The IFE is closely linked to Jamaat-e-Islami, a South Asian Islamist group. For a look into its thinking, see this speech last week by its leader Syed Munawar Hasan:

Continue Reading

Following the announcement about the “revamping” of the Richard Dawkins forum, which created a global wave of panic, alarm, anger and frightened responses from atheists, the New Humanist website revealed a sinister plot was a afoot.

The New Humanist’s discovered a Christian website called Christwire attributing the closure of the forums to the power of prayer; here’s what Christwire had to say:-

For years we warned atheists that we would take down their site entitled RichardDawkins.net, by the power prayer.

The atheists laughed and said prayer did not exist. They cursed us and said there was no God. I warned them time and again, and now, we see the true power of God as he has closed their sinful site, RichardDawkins.net.

This was the New Humanist response to these claims:-

So there you have it. And if you’re wondering why they hate Dawkins so, here it is:

“For those of you who do not know, Richard Dawkins is one of the worst offenders before God. He promotes bestial relations. He thinks that a “less evolved” human man and a monkey woman had sexual relations to create us.”A fairly accurate summary of The Selfish Gene, wouldn’t you say?

The laugh was on the New Humanists however, when they discovered the following about the website Christwire:-

Update: Okay, so it turns out the Christian website is a spoof (thanks Jared). Still funny though, and to be fair we’ve seen plenty of non-spoof evangelical statements even more ridiculous than that, so you can see how it got us!

Just shows even humanists can be wrong

On a more serious note, Matt Wardman over at the Online Journalism Blog, has written an excellent post looking at the coverage of the Dawkins forum “episode” in the Telegraph:-

Telegraph invents comparative degrees of atheism. Dawkins = “athiest”

Israel Today:-

Dozens of young Arab Muslims holed up in the Al Aqsa Mosque atop Jerusalem’s Temple Mount attacked visiting Jews and Christians with stones on Sunday morning.

Two Israeli police officers and at least 10 of the Muslim rioters were injured in the ensuing clash.

The riots then spread to Arab areas outside the Old City, where young Muslim stone-throwers attacked Israeli police and soldiers. Several arrests were made, but no more injuries were reported.

The violent demonstrations were believed to be in response to last week’s decision by the Israeli cabinet to add the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron and Rachel’s Tomb in Bethlehem to its list of national heritage sites. Both towns are under Palestinian control.

The decision to officially recognize the sites as sacred to Jews and improve their preservation as such has already resulted in widespread riots in Hebron and Bethlehem. The international community has also harshly condemned Israel’s decision.

An interesting and informative article in the National Post today looking at the controversy surrounding the move to canonize Pope Pius XII.

Is Pope Pius XII the The Nazi pope who facilitated Nazi aims, or is he the misunderstood and much maligned protector of the Jews, in a harrowing period of history? You decide:-

Holy Post:-

The road to sainthood is never speedy, but rarely is it as divisive as the campaign to canonize Pope Pius XII. Just last week, a group of prominent Catholic scholars urged Pope Benedict to slow down the process in order to better assess contradictory evidence. Some see the Pope, who reigned over the Roman Catholic Church during the Second World War, as a pro-Nazi collaborator and anti-Semite who went along with the Holocaust. To others, including some prominent Jews, he was an anti-Nazi, who actively saved Jews, risking his own safety and that of the Church in defence of the persecuted. To add to the complexity, many historians say Pius was neither a war criminal nor a saint, just a complicated individual caught in one of history’s most catastrophic conflicts. The National Post’s Charles Lewis looks at some of the leading theories in the complex case for and against the making of his road to sainthood.

Read More

Two articles in the Times today looking at the “Catholic vote”.

Ruth Gledhill – Times

Roman Catholic bishops enter pre-election fray

The Roman Catholic Church will wade into the general election campaign next week with a controversial document condemning the loss of virtue in public life.

In their pre-election manifesto, Catholic bishops are expected to take a line that is economically to the left of centre but conservative on social issues such as marriage, education and care for the elderly.

They will argue for the right to religious freedom at a time when secularist campaigning is on the rise as never before. The document will also be interpreted as a warning to the Conservatives that their more liberal attitude to certain social issues, such as homosexuality, threatens to alienate a core block of swing voters in an election where the religious vote is regarded as crucial to the outcome.

In the document, discussed with the Pope when the bishops were in Rome for their ad limina visit earlier this year, the Catholic bishops of England and Wales warn that regulation has replaced virtue in public life. They condemn the substitution of red tape and petty rules for virtue, the loss of trust, the financial collapse, the decimation of social capital, the loss of human dignity in policies on migration, the devastation to the global environment and the repeated attempts to erode religious freedoms in Britain.

Continue Reading

Philip Collins – Times

Catholic Church voting guide will be claimed by the Tories

It was once famously said that the Anglican Church was the Conservative Party at prayer. If that adage was ever true it abruptly ceased to be in the autumn of 1985. When the Church of England’s Commission on Urban Priority Areas published Faith in the City, a report that blamed the Thatcher Government for spiritual and economic poverty, ministers were incensed.

One Cabinet minister dismissed the report as “pure Marxist theology” and claimed it proved beyond doubt that the Anglican Church was governed by “a load of communist clerics”.

It is unlikely that any Labour minister will react with quite such anger to the publication of the Roman Catholic Church’s guide to voting in the next general election. The document is scrupulously non-partisan in the sense that it endorses no political party. That is wise politics, for the largely Catholic segments of the northern and Scottish cities are almost exclusively Labour areas.

Continue Reading

Strangely, I found this to be quite an interesting and entertaining article by Terry Sanderson (National Secular Society President) reflecting on the goings on, of the last week:-

An interesting week for secularism – Editorial by Terry Sanderson

This week has been an interesting one for secularism in Britain. It began with the announcement by the Government that it intended to amend — at the behest of the Catholic Church — its Children’s, Schools and Families Bill provisions on mandatory sex and relationship education in all schools. After whingeing from the Catholic Education Society, Mr Balls gave an opt-out for “faith schools” to teach sex education in conformity with the teachings of the faith. He insisted that it would not compromise the Bill in any way. But he did not adequately explain why, if that was the case, the amendment was necessary in the first place. (See also this interesting video on YouTube on what it will mean in practice).

Mr Balls received a massive kicking for watering down the requirements – not least from the NSS, which was on the front line of attack for this further disgraceful concession to the “faith communities”. (You can read all about it by following the links in the “NSS Speaks Out” feature below.)

No sooner had this gift been given to the Catholic Church, than the Government’s (zealously Catholic) Scottish Secretary, Jim Murphy, gave a speech in Westminster opining that religion has a big part to play in politics and that the Labour Party should court the “faith vote”. It wasn’t clear what exactly he wanted the party to do, beyond an embrace of “family values” (a concept that takes on a sinisterly authoritarian shade in a Catholic context), but presumably appealing to religious voters means giving them something in exchange for their vote.

Continue Reading

Check out George Pitcher’s (Telegraph) comments during the week:-

Secularist Terry Sanderson launches bizarre attack on Scottish Secretary Jim Murphy’s faith in politics

Christian Today – Christian families in Iraq are fleeing the northern town of Mosul in droves after a string of unprovoked murders left at least 10 believers dead, a ministry working with persecuted churches have reported.

&

Catholic News Agency – Bishops in Iraq urge government to halt slaughter of Christians

&

Spero News – The Vatican newspaper, Osservatore Romano, published on February 26 a letter from Cardinal Secretary of State Tarcisio Bertone S.D.B. to Nouri Kamil al-Maliki, prime minister of Iraq, expressing Pope Benedict’s concern over attacks against Christians there.

&

Spero – Mosul – More Christian blood shed in Mosul in northern Iraq. This morning an armed commando killed a young university student and wounded a friend who was at the place of the attack. The umpteenth targeted attack against the community is just the latest in a long streak of blood, a short distance from where the double murder of two traders took place and the kidnapping of a man, on 13 February.

Pray, pray, pray.

CBN - Erick Stakelbeck (Hat-tip Solomonia)

Have you ever heard of a supposedly “pro Israel” group that has issued more press releases condemning Christian Zionists than it has Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadenijad, Hezbollah and Syria combined? No? Then welcome to J Street, the self-described “pro Israel, pro peace” lobbying group that bends over backwards to insult Israel’s friends and supporters, especially evangelical Christians, and makes a living off of criticizing Israeli government policies.

I’ve discussed J Street’s naked anti-Christian bigotry before (see here and here) but since they are at it again (more on that in a bit), I felt compelled to undertake a little research project. I went to J Street’s website and surveyed the group’s press releases from the past year and a half. The results? To start, four press releases (including one from February 1, 2010) attacking John Hagee and Christians United for Israel (CUFI). Indeed, two of J Street’s first four press releases were devoted to slamming Hagee. Talk about misguided priorities: a purportedly pro-Israel group using all of this ink on Hagee and evangelical supporters of Israel at a time when Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran and Syria are stockpiling increasingly lethal weapons and publicly calling for Israel’s destruction.

In those press releases, J Street essentially painted Hagee–a man Senator (and orthodox Jew) Joseph Lieberman once compared to Moses–as a closet anti-Semite and portrayed Christian supporters of Israel as some sort of wild-eyed, apocalyptic death cult (a strategy which this release by J Street’s founder, Jeremy Ben-Ami, took to new extremes).  But what may be even more offensive is that J Street has come up with exactly one–one–press release condeming genocidal Iranian dictator Mahmoud Ahmadenijad. And zero press releases condeming either Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah or Syrian president Bashar al-Assad, two others who regularly threaten Israel’s demise. If J Street wants ”end times” and “apocalyptic,” then Ahmadenijad, Assad and Nasrallah–who all met yesterday in Damascus to plot further attacks against Israel–are certainly the real deal. So why the bizarre preoccupation with evangelical Christians, an extremely large and influential group that Israeli government officials of every political persuasion routinely hail as among the Jewish people’s greatest friends and supporters?

I was greeted by the same puzzling output when scanning through opinion pieces penned by “members of J Street’s Advisory Council and by its staff and friends.” No less than three scathing op-eds that mention Hagee or CUFI in the title, and others, like this one, that slam them in the body of the piece. Yet not one op-ed that mentions Ahmadenijad, Nasrallah or Assad in the title, or Hamas for that matter. Christian supporters of Israel and Israeli government officials, on the other hand, are specifically targeted for criticism. Again, this is a quite peculiar strategy for a “pro-Israel” group to pursue.

Which brings us to the latest example. J Street founder Jeremy Ben-Ami once again mischaracterized CUFI recently, erroneously claiming that the group contributed money to a certain Israeli organization. I won’t go into all the details here–rather, I  strongly encourage you to read two comprehensive responses to J Street written by a pair of CUFI spokesmen (see here and here).

Bottom line: J Street’s press releases, writings and public statements reflect a great deal of time and energy spent cutting down Israel’s friends and supporters–with a special venom reserved for evangelical Christians–not to mention, the Netanyahu government. On the other hand,  the group has spent precious little time condeming Israel’s sworn enemies. You can call this perplexing tactic many things. Pro-Israel is not one of them.

I noticed earlier from Catholic news feeds that the Pontifical Council for Culture had announced that it is creating a foundation to focus on relations with atheists and agnostics. I didn’t report on it at the time, however, as P Z Myers has done so, I thought I’d give you his take on this:-

Where’s my invitation? – P Z Myers

This beggars belief, Cross-post MediaWatchWatch:-

Brazil Catholics sue Hollywood for crumbling Redeemer image

The Catholic Church of Brazil seems to be under the impression that it owns any image of the famous Christ the Redeemer sculpture which stands high above Rio de Janeiro, and is suing Columbia Pictures for using it in last year’s blockbuster 2012.

The apocalyptic film shows Rio being destroyed by a tidal wave, and the 40-metre statue crumbling under the water.

The Archdiocese of Rio de Janeiro, who commissioned the sculpture in 1931, refused permission to Columbia when they asked to use the image in their film, but Columbia went ahead anyway. The Archdiocese’s laweyer, Claudine Dutra, explained:

many faithful have said they are shocked and offended by the images of the destruction of this sanctuary that the archdiocese wanted to preserve.

We want Columbia Pictures to publicly declare that it did not intend to cause offense.

They are also seeking undisclosed damages.

Funnily enough, director Roland Emmerich wanted to include a scene which showed the destruction of the Kaaba – the holy rock-in-a-box towards which devout Muslims point the crown of their head five times a day. But he feared a fatwa.

Cross-post Cranmers Curate:-

This by Cranmer’s Curate first appeared on the US-based news service for Anglican Communion orthodoxy, VirtueOnline:

Thank the good Lord the Holy Spirit did not inspire ‘money is the root of all evils’ to be written but rather ‘the love of money is the root of all evils’ (1 Timothy 6v10 – RSV).

As postmodernism strengthens its grip on the Western mind, money is one of the few inescapable realities left in the institutional Church. At gatherings of Anglican clergy at the local level, Laodicean self-delusion is now pandemic. If there is a worldview unifying the diversity of ‘traditions’ around the room, it would be the religion of the new Volkswagen advertisement – Dudeism.

The dude has a worldview suited for the times, he’s in touch with the modern world, he doesn’t get hung up on old doctrines – in fact he’s inclined to satirise them with a dry one-liner. But the satire towards others is balanced by the self-mockery on the T-shirt, which shows that the dude is basically a nice guy.

Dudeism is comfortable driving through ambiguous ideological terrain – in fact the vehicle has been designed to do that – and it is chilled about picking up the passengers of the permissive society.

Amongst the dudes in dog-collars, the most extraordinary theological opinions are affirmed as insightful, even by professing Evangelicals. If the dudes are exercised about anything, it is about the ‘quality of relationships’. But don’t expect to hear the dudes mention biblical holiness as a quality that should be characterising these touchy-feely ‘relationships’. And of course to state categorically which ones should be genuinely touch-feely and which ones not and with whom would be to commit the one cardinal sin for the dude – ‘judgementalism’.

It is such a relief that in this clerical Avatar world of in-your-face 3D theological diversity there is the God-given and inescapable reality of hard cash. This cosy, postmodern, all-affirming, dudeistic love-in cannot escape from the reality of the diocesan budget deficit. It cannot escape from the reality that sustainable churches are those with enough regenerate Christians whom the Holy Spirit has moved to give real money generously and sacrificially to the work of Christ’s Kingdom in and through their local church.

In their behaviour within the institutional Church, Christlikeness demands that these viable churches should not become arrogant or bullying or reactionary. Their financial generosity is a work of God’s unmerited grace in them as the Holy Spirit has applied the Word of God to their minds, hearts and actions.

But the problem now facing these orthodox churches is that they are becoming the victims of their own success. Unlike churches that have dwindled into non-viability because of a liberal-induced famine of the Word of God down the years, they can afford a vicar and therefore they are liable to get one. But God spare them a new vicar in the form of one of the dudes posing as an Evangelical.

This mainly affects medium-sized Anglican Evangelical churches, Conservative and Charismatic. The megachurches are able to call the shots with dioceses over appointments. But Evangelical churches that are viable but not mega are much more susceptible to pressure from liberal-led dioceses to take a soft Evangelical incumbent or one who will turn out to be less than a fighter for biblical truth, one who is not going to threaten the dudeist status quo.

Unfortunately, this practical downside to the inside strategy of Evangelicals trying to operate within the structures of the institutional Church is happening on the ground. Generous, godly, viable churches with an evangelistic track record are being sold postmodern dudes for pastors.

The Apostle Paul’s prayer in Philippians 1v9-11 is so very urgent for local churches facing appointments in these increasingly dangerous times: ‘And it is my prayer that your love may abound more and more, with knowledge and all discernment, so that you may be pure and blameless for the day of Christ, filled with the fruits of righteousness which come through Jesus Christ, to the glory and praise of God’ (RSV).

Orthodox Anglican churches facing vacancies really do the need the spiritual discernment to spot the dude at the interview and issue the Archdeacon with a firm no thank you.

Otherwise, institutional neo-liberalism, which is dudeistic in theory but not in political practice, could win by stealth.

I just wanted to draw your attention to a fascinating discussion over at The Church of Jesus Christ.

Question of the Day: Is Hell a Necessary Christian Doctrine

There has been an inordinate amount of outrage online relating to this small article in Dutch News today:-

Christians can’t vote for Wilders, say vicars

A Christian cannot vote for Geert Wilders’ anti-immigration party PVV, say 75% of church leaders in a poll of 1,200 ministers and church workers in the Nederlands Dagblad.

The ministers represent a cross-section of all the Netherlands’ Protestant churches, representing 2.3 million people, the paper says.

One third of the people polled said there were people who supported Wilders in their communities and 5% said Wilders had a lot of support.

‘Wilders and the PVV’s views contradict Christianity,’ one minister told the paper.

As you will note from comments on this article, there is little sympathy for these church leaders simply stating that Christians cannot vote for Geert Wilders, and the accusation that these leaders are “out of touch”.

Church leaders in the UK have made similar comments in recent times relating to the British National Party. Most notably in July last year, BNP members were banned from joining the Methodist Church,

It was back in October that a joint statement was issued by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, stating that; “Christians have been deeply disturbed by the conscious adoption by the BNP  of the language of our faith“.

Towards the end of last year the Archbishop of Wales Barry Morgan became embroiled in a furious war of words with the BNP, over the far-right party’s claim to represent “Christian values”.

We also had the embarrassing episode whereby, David North a Churchwarden from Melton Mowbray, was bullied into resigning, after church leaders deemed that his membership of the British National Party (BNP) was “incompatible” with Christianity.

The truth is that I do not believe that church leaders should be banning or discriminating against folks who vote for, or are members of, any legal political body, no matter how distasteful we may find their “politics”.

This may sound a little ironic to regular readers, as I have often posted rebuttals of the BNP claims to represent Christianity, especially articles written by Edmund Standing, see; here, here, here & here.

My point in saying this, is that it is pointless church leaders simply saying Christians mustn’t be involved with political parties such as the BNP, they must make a strong case as to why this is so.

I personally know of some Christians who are leaning towards the BNP right now. These are good folk, who are utterly disillusioned with the “main” political parties on a number of issues, especially, immigration, the perceived rise of Islamic extremism and the erosion of a “Christian British cultural identity”. Readers have to be aware that as Christians we are acutely aware of the horrific persecution of our brothers and sisters in Islamic lands, which gives additional impetus to the fear of the rise of Islamic extremism in this country.

The BNP are cunningly attempting to fill a vacuum and tap in to a Christian sense of abandonment by the “main” political parties, and have gone as far as to clone and hijack Christianity through the Rev West West’s Christian Council of Britain. Do take the time to read the interesting comments on this blog relating to the Rev Robert West, including some from Rev West himself.

The British National Party (BNP) candidate styles himself as Rev.

I agree with the Communities Secretary John Denham, who last October called on faith groups to “nail the lie that the BNP is a “Christian party”, however, this does not take place by “bashing” those Christians who have been duped by the BNP, but by informing them and peeling off the skin of the BNP Christian claims.

I’ll say publicly that at one stage I was personally leaning toward the BNP, until I began reading articles written by Edmund Standing, who worked tirelessly to highlight the inconsistency of the BNP’s Christian claims (even though he himself is an atheist), but sadly has now stopped this work (tired of swimming in the sewers), which left a worrying gaping hole.

Thankfully, the website “There is nothing British about the BNP” has picked up the gauntlet today:-

Why there’s Nothing British about the BNP’s “Christian values”

Nick Griffin and the British National Party are keen to portray themselves as on the sides of traditional British culture.  They see a gap in the market that they can fill. While other parties surrender to multiculturalism, Islam, and politically correct secularism, the BNP stand up for traditional British Christianity. This is nonsense. There is nothing Christian about the BNP.

On the BBC’s ‘Question Time’ programme, British National Party leader Nick Griffin stated: ‘If Muslims do stay in this country they must remember that Britain is essentially a fundamentally British and Christian country’. The BNP is a ‘Christian’ party that can save ‘Christian culture’

The BNP have created a front organisation called the ‘Christian Council of Britain’, headed by BNP activist and electoral candidate Robert West who leads religious services at various BNP events, including the party’s ‘Red, White & Blue’ and reportedly preaches on topics such as ‘the importance of nationalism’ and how “homosexuals do greatly err”. For West, a multi-racial society is a form of ‘Holocaust’, with immigration used to create “Lebensraum” for the Third  World. Despite initially denying any connection with the BNP, West has admitted that the BNP “encouraged and facilitated” its establishment.

Why the BNP are not Christian

-          There’s nothing Christian about the BNP’s ethics. For Jesus Christ, humanity was all part of one family. Christianity from the outset taught a universal message which dissolved the idea of race or nation, teaching that it is of no significance to God. He said that we should love our neighbour, preach the good news and understanding to all nations. He taught the parable of the Good Samaritan, to show our true neighbours were not just those from the same race. Most of all, he abhorred violence and the hatred that is fascism’s speciality.

-          The BNP use Christianity as an excuse to attack Muslims. Rather than refer to the actual teachings of Christ, the BNP’s favoured role model are the Crusaders. In a letter, Nick Griffin wrote “We will never allow our children to become a minority in our homeland! We will fight to the bitter end, just like our Crusader ancestors, to preserve our Christian culture and heritage. The spirit of the Medieval Knights lives on in all of us!”

-          The BNP’s use Christianity as an excuse for their homophobia. British fascism has a history of extreme homophobia. While the party’s policy is no longer officially to ban homosexual activity, they are always keen to claim that homosexuals are an affront to Britain’s ‘Christian heritage’. 

-          The BNP’s real ideology is pagan. Christianity, of course, is a “foreign import”, and for the extreme activists within the BNP inner circle, like all other imports it must be purged.

The BNP’s Foreign Affairs spokesman Arthur Kemp wrote in his March of Titans that “the introduction of Christianity has to count as the single greatest ideological catastrophe to ever strike Europe.”

Ever since Himmler’s obsession with the occult, there has been a strain of Paganism with fascism, as zealots attempt to reclaim a purely European religion.

Lee Barnes, the BNP’s legal director, is a particular fan: ‘Christianity is a semitic religion, it is creature [sic] of the deserts of the Middle East not the forests of the Northern Europe [sic] and its symbol the cross is an instrument of torture not of living redemption’. In place of Christianity, Barnes advocates Odinism, the worship of the Norse pagan gods of pre-Christian Europe, and he connects the Odinic ‘tree of life’ (Yggdrasil) with a religion based on race: ‘The roots represent our descent from the Gods and our connection to the Earth, the trunk represents our shared European racial heritage, the main branches of the tree our nations and tribes, the twigs on each branch represent each family unit and each single leaf symbolises an individual life’.

As the Director of Public Prosecutions has just released the long anticipated new guidelines on assisted suicide, I anticipate quite a bit of interesting analysis, so I’ll post links here.

As I was musing over the the stark differences between the Christian community’s view of euthanasia and many non-believers, I suddenly realised that many non-believers tend to view humans as no different than animals. On this blog we frequently receive pro-euthanasia comments from non-believers, that simply ask why should we not have “mercy” on humans as we do dogs and “put them out of their misery”.

Anyway, here are the first of the Internet links:-

I’m putting George Pitcher from the Telegraph first, because he has been on particularly fine form.

Geroge Pitcher Telegraph – Rejoice! DPP deals severe blow to Dignity in Dying’s hopes for assisted suicide

Church of England – Response to the Director of Public Prosecutions’ Policy for Prosecutors in Respect of Cases of Encouraging or Assisting Suicide

Telegraph – Keir Starmer, the Director of Public Prosecutions, set out a list of factors for prosecutors to consider when deciding whether to charge someone who had assisted a suicide. There are six that will sway decision against prosecution.

Lee Rayfield Guardian – Let’s not take the path of assisted dying – Arguments in favour of assisted dying play on our sense of compassion – but they should be resisted

The Christian Institute – Pro-lifers have voiced their concern over new assisted suicide guidelines, published today, which say prosecutions are unlikely if the act was “motivated by compassion”.

CPS – Assisted Suidce Guidelines

Telegraph – Relatives who profit from assisted suicide may not be charged – People who assist another person commit suicide and then make a financial gain from the death can still escape charges under new prosecution guidelines.

Telegraph – The new policy on prosecuting assisted suicides, published yesterday by Keir Starmer QC, the Director of Public Prosecutions, might make those who campaign for legalised euthanasia in Britain wish they had been more careful about what they asked for.

CCFON – The Department of Public Prosecutions must uphold Parliament’s view that assisting suicide is a serious crime and not necessarily an act of mercy, says Professor John Keown.

Church Times – THE CHURCH of England has commended changes to policy for prosecutors on assisted suicide, published on Thursday by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), Keir Starmer QC.

LifeSite – Despite urgent warnings from the British pro-life movement and shouts of triumph from euthanasia campaigners, a statement from the Catholic Bishops Conference of England and Wales has “welcomed” newly published legal guidelines on the prosecution of assisted suicide cases, saying they have given “greater protection” to vulnerable people.

Catholic News Agency – Vulnerable better protected by new assisted suicide prosecution policy, says Archbishop Smith

Two quite depressingly realistic posts on “sex education”:-

Cranmer – Teaching abortion in an ‘enlightened’ and ‘non-judgmental’ way

Aunti Joanna – Much discussion today, at a pro-life working group which tackles such matters, about latest developments on the Govt’s sex education scheme.

Whilst I’m linking, Ruth Gledhill has been the first to comment on the new guidelines on assisted suicide, which have just been released by the DPP:-

Ruth Gledhill Times – Assisted suicide guidelines ‘blunt’ the law, warn faith groups

Melanie Phillips – Spectator

I have been following for some time the remarkable journey of Mosab Hassan Yousef, about whom I wrote here last year. Yousef, the son of a Hamas leader, renounced not just terrorist violence but his family and his faith to become a Christian and move to California. Since apostasy from Islam carries a death penalty, this in itself was an act of extreme courage. The Telegraph ran an interview with him which set out starkly the extreme risk he was running, along with the principled reasons for his actions:

Continue Reading

SaltShakers

The Word: I have set watchmen on your walls, O Jerusalem; They shall never hold their peace day or night. You who make mention of the LORD, do not keep silent, and give Him no rest till He establishes and till He makes Jerusalem a praise in the earth. The LORD has sworn by His right hand and by the arm of His strength:”Surely I will no longer give your grain as food for your enemies; and the sons of the foreigner shall not drink your new wine, for which you have laboured. But those who have gathered it shall eat it, and praise the LORD; Those who have brought it together shall drink it in My holy courts.” Go through, go through the gates! Prepare the way for the people; Build up, Build up the highway! Take out the stones, lift up a banner for the peoples! Indeed the LORD has proclaimed to the end of the world:”Say to the daughter of Zion, ‘Surely your salvation is coming; Behold, His reward is with Him, and His work before Him.’” And they shall call them The Holy People, the Redeemed of the LORD; and you shall be called Sought Out, A City Not Forsaken. (Isaiah 62:6-12)

‘Jerusalem shall be inhabited as towns without walls, because of the multitude of men and livestock in it. For I,’ says the LORD, ‘will be a wall of fire all around her, and I will be the glory in her midst.’ ”
(Zechariah 2:4-5)

• Pointers for prayer:

• Stolen Identity: Once again, as we continue to stand with Israel, may all our actions, support & prayer be lead by the Holy Spirit. Please pray that we would have ears to hear, and hearts open to the areas the Lord wants us to be effective in. Please pray that many within the church would have a clear revelation regarding God’s purposes for Israel. Pray that we would have many opportunities to share the truth regarding Israel within our churches and fellowships. Please pray for strength and wisdom for the leaders in Israel, especially Prime Minister Netanyahu to deal with the threats of Abbas regarding Israel’s national heritage sites.

• On your walls O Jerusalem: Praise God for the constant reminders of the truth as to whom the land of Israel belongs to. As archaeologists unearth more proof of historical Israel, do pray that many in the Church would make the connection with the Israel of the Bible, and the Israel of today.

• Pray for truth: There continues to be much deception and propaganda surrounding the whole issue of Israel. This week, the controversial Respect MP George Galloway was speaking at a meeting in Haringey, London, to mark the “anniversary” of the 2008/09 conflict in Gaza Please pray that the truth will be revealed and that lies and deception will be cast down, wherever they are found.

Stolen Identity

Continue Reading

I read yesterday P Z Myers leaping to the defence of fellow disciple Richard Dawkins, over his plans to “revise” the structure of his forums, because of the prevalence of “unsavoury” comments. The changing structure of the Dawkins forums has caused an avalanche of raw panic among atheists, or as P Z Myers articulates; “a great deal of unwarranted anxiety”.

I’ll hand over to David at Anglican Samiszdat to furnish us with more details:-

Richard Dawkins keeps attracting the wrong sorts of people

Richard Dawkins is re-vamping his forum – which he modestly calls “a clear thinking oasis” – and, because of that, people have been calling him names.

Dawkins puts this down to there being something rotten in the Internet culture. He might have a point to a degree, but, comically, the rather obvious thing he has overlooked is that a forum devoted to atheism attracts a lot of people who are more interested in irrationally venting their spleen than in calm reasoned argument.

From the exchanges with atheists on this blog, I have noticed that most atheists – all who have commented here – are emotional atheists: their belief system is based mainly on feeling. When a visiting atheists is asked to explain himself, one is confronted by a torrent of chaotic, emotive, unexamined aphorisms and clichés.

Just as he overlooks the obvious reason for Creation, Dawkins overlooks the obvious reason for the name-calling. Here is some of Dawkins’ response:

A Message from Richard Dawkins about the website updates

Imagine that you, as a greatly liked and respected person, found yourself overnight subjected to personal vilification on an unprecedented scale, from anonymous commenters on a website. Suppose you found yourself described as an “utter twat” a “suppurating rectum. A suppurating rat’s rectum. A suppurating rat’s rectum inside a dead skunk that’s been shoved up a week-old dead rhino’s twat.” Or suppose that somebody on the same website expressed a “sudden urge to ram a fistful of nails” down your throat. Also to “trip you up and kick you in the guts.” And imagine seeing your face described, again by an anonymous poster, as “a slack jawed turd in the mouth mug if ever I saw one.”

What do you have to do to earn vitriol like that? Eat a baby? Gas a trainload of harmless and defenceless people? Rape an altar boy? Tip an old lady out of her wheel chair and kick her in the teeth before running off with her handbag?

None of the above. What you have to do is write a letter like this:

Dear forum members,

We wanted you all to know at the earliest opportunity about our new website currently in development. RichardDawkins.net will have a new look and feel, improved security, and much more. Visits to the site have really grown over the past 3 1/2 years, and this update gives us an opportunity to address several issues. Over the years we’ve become one of the world’s leading resources for breaking rational and scientific news from all over the net and creating original content. We are focusing on quality content distribution, and will be bringing more original articles, video and other content as we grow.

The new RichardDawkins.net will have a fully-integrated discussion section. This will be a new feature for the site, similar to the current forum, but not identical. We feel the new system will be much cleaner and easier to use, and hopefully this will encourage participation from a wider variety of users.

We will leave the current forum up for 30 days, giving regular users an opportunity to locally archive any content they value. When the new website goes live, you are welcome to submit these posts as new discussions. The forum will then be taken down from the web. You will not loose your username on the new system.

The new discussion area will not be a new forum. It will be different. We will be using a system of tags to categorize items, instead of sub-forums. Discussions can have multiple tags, such as “Education”, “Children”, and “Critical Thinking”. Starting a new discussion will require approval, so we ask that you only submit new discussions that are truly relevant to reason and science. Subsequent responses on the thread will not need approval—however anything off topic or violating the new terms of service will be removed. The approval process will be there to ensure the quality of posts on the site. This is purely an editorial exercise to help new visitors find quality content quickly. We hope this discussion area will reflect the foundation’s goals and values.

We know that this is a big decision. We know some of you will be against this change. We ask that you respect our decision and help make this transition as smooth as possible.

We’re confident that these changes will improve the site experience and we look forward to seeing what you do with the new system.

Many thanks again.

[…..]

Surely there has to be something wrong with people who can resort to such over-the-top language, over-reacting so spectacularly to something so trivial. Even some of those with more temperate language are responding to the proposed changes in a way that is little short of hysterical. Was there ever such conservatism, such reactionary aversion to change, such vicious language in defence of a comfortable status quo? What is the underlying agenda of these people? How can anybody feel that strongly about something so small? Have we stumbled on some dark, territorial atavism? Have private fiefdoms been unwittingly trampled?

Be that as it may, what this remarkable bile suggests to me is that there is something rotten in the Internet culture that can vent it. If I ever had any doubts that RD.net needs to change, and rid itself of this particular aspect of Internet culture, they are dispelled by this episode.

If you are one of those who have dealt out such ludicrously hyperbolic animosity, you know who should receive your private apology. And if you are one of those who are as disgusted by it as I am, you know where to send your warm letter of support.

Richard

In my last post on the “cleansing” of “undesirable” Christians from Iraq by Islamic extremists, I made this comment:-

It’s not just the Christians but the Jews as well of course, as we together are the despised “People of the Book”.

Coincidentally the ElderofZiyon blog have just posted this:-

Are Muslims obligated to hate all Jews and Christians?

Last week, an op-ed was written by a Dr. Hamad Al-Majid in Asharq al-Awsat, calling on Muslims to interpret the Quran in liberal ways that would allow respect for non-Muslims:

I think that with a careful Shariaa reading of a number of texts on this subject, and by confining this [hatred] to specific cases, many problems and dilemmas would be solved, and this could even have help in consolidating social peace, especially in the Muslim countries where acts of violence are being carried out against their Christian minorities such as Egypt and Nigeria. This is something would also need to be taught as part of the academic syllabus, and this may be the key to solving this problem.

When I was working for the Islamic Center in London in the 1990s, I saw for myself the state of confusion in the British people who had recently converted to Islam when they were taught the principles of hatred, rather than [peaceful] disagreement. This had a negative impact in the way in which they treated other people; their parents, their brothers and sisters, their family and friends, and so Islam lost a number of potential converts who might have been attracted to the religion had they been treated with more respect and compassion.

It appears that many Muslims were very unhappy with Dr. al-Majid’s liberal interpretation. So much so that he felt compelled to write a follow-up, possibly out of fear, saying that the Muslims that passionately hate Christians and Jews have solid textual evidence for their feelings:

Continue Reading

Sums it all up really. I’m sick to my stomach of reading every single day of fresh murders of Christians in Islamic lands, I really am.